Let us read from the book of John, Chapter 2, verse 15...
OK, let me paraphrase...Jesus gets mad at some money changers hanging out and doing business in the temple, so he fashions a whip and goes into the temple and drives them all out under threat of violence.
But, I thought Jesus was supposed to be peaceful and sin-free? Is it not sinful to whip other people? Ah, some apologists have jumped on this and said that the Bible doesn't say that he actually whipped anyone, so it's all right. But, it's not all right. It's certainly against the law in this country to threaten someone with a weapon (it's called assault at the least). Even if Jesus merely used the whip to frighten the money changers out of the temple, he assaulted them. This is not moral, and violates the same laws that he laid forth in some of his sermons. Apparently, we find once again that god does not have to follow the same moral laws that he expects all of us to follow.
56 comments:
This story leads the mind to wonder. The other day I was reading in Leviticus and was left totally dumb-founded; the animal sacrifices that had to be performed for each and every thing you did wrong in God's eyes was absurd. First I thought, holy shit, what a ton of blood and guts! What a stentch! What the hell did they do with all that burnt flesh.
And then it blew me away that God says the smell of all this burnt flesh is pleasing to Him! Pleasing? HA HA. What idiot would love the smell of burning carcass and blood (don't mistake this for you afternoon BBQ - ask your fireman what burning flesh smells like)
Can you imagine. Over a million people in and out all day long bringing cattle, sheep, goats, doves ... to be slaughtered. There is even a sacrifice that had to be made if you "sinned" against God but at the time of the "sin" you didn't even know you were sinning.
I consider myself to be fairly straight-laced and after reading this shit I realized that I would have needed at least a 20 acre farm to raise enough "unblemished" cattle, goats, pigeons, etc. etc. to take of all my "sins" (now these couldn't be just any old cow/steer, they had to be perfect specimens)
SO BACK TO THE WHIP. Was Jesus some sort of major bad-ass? Now I'm thinking, there are a lot of people who could be pretty intimidating with a whip, like Hulk Hogan or Michael Strahan, but even those two guys couldn't have cleared out the way Jesus supposedly did.
Imagine, every day, hundreds and thousands of people showing up to make their scrifices and they have no bull or poor little dove to kill. So they need to buy one. do you think we're talking some
30'x 30' room? Hell no! We're talking the entire field of your favorite fucking football stadium.
And Jesus went in and kicked all their fucking asses! What a dude!
Don't be a fool. The temple was huge, but hardly a football stadium, and only one out of many rooms actually had an altar.
The reason he was angry was that the money changers made sacrifices difficult. Since all money at the time had the face of the Roman emperor, the money changers said it was "Pagan" and you could not use it to buy anything in Jerusalem.
What they did was they made new money with a Jewish emblem, then made it so you could trade in in many Roman coins for a single Jewish coin. Then, they only sold animals, sacrifices, for the Jewish money. PPeople would have to spend many times as much money for a single animal than they would normally for a few, and the money changers were getting rich.
Jesus was against this, so he flipped the stalls and whipped the animals, (Only the animals. He didn't attack a single man) and made them leave along with the money changers, since they had greedy intent.
"Don't be a fool. The temple was huge, but hardly a football stadium, and only one out of many rooms actually had an altar."
Source? And, what does it matter how many rooms had an altar?
Actually, what's your source for most of the information you're putting forth? You seem to have detailed information, especially about Jesus's actions:
"Jesus was against this, so he flipped the stalls and whipped the animals, (Only the animals. He didn't attack a single man) and made them leave along with the money changers, since they had greedy intent."
How do you know that he only whipped animals (the Bible does not say this, and there's no extra-Biblical accounts that you draw from)? And, are you saying that he made the animals leave because they had greedy intent? (Seriously, who is the "them" that were made to leave?) And, he still threatened them which would be assault, even if your version were true.
"The reason he was angry was that the money changers made sacrifices difficult."
Really? I'm glad that you have intimate knowledge of what Jesus was thinking that is not in the Bible, but how do you know that? Also, why would Jesus be bent out of shape about sacrifices, especially if they were about to be phased out? Lastly, do you not even remember the sermon on the mount? "He was has anger in his heart is guilty of murder." [Paraphrased] This makes Jesus guilty of murder as you confess that he was angry at the moneychangers, so he murdered them according to his own rules. Therefore, he's not sinless.
No, he was not guilty of murder. The point of the sermon was, if you hold on to your anger, you'll will be led towards terrible actions. If you have thoughts of murder, and hold onto those thoughts, you may end up murdering, so it's best to let them go.
Second, Jesus cast out the animals with the money changers, since market did not belong in the temple. Same goes for flipping the stalls.
The majority of my information comes from how the bible described the temple. I can give you a link to a map created from what information the bible gives.
http://z.about.com/d/atheism/1/0/O/F/map_JerTemple-l.jpg
"No, he was not guilty of murder. The point of the sermon was, if you hold on to your anger, you'll will be led towards terrible actions. If you have thoughts of murder, and hold onto those thoughts, you may end up murdering, so it's best to let them go."
Says you. That's not how many other Xians interpret that passage. You'll also notice that adultery is the same way, that if you look at another person with lust then you are guilty of adultery, not that you will end up doing something you shouldn't. Now, to be charitable, your interpretation could be valid, but still, has Jesus not set himself down the path of the dark side as per your own comments? Is this not a sin? I don't see how someone could be called sinless while flirting with hellfire.
"Second, Jesus cast out the animals with the money changers, since market did not belong in the temple. Same goes for flipping the stalls."
Both Mark and Matthew claim he drove out everyone (as does John by saying "all"). Even so, throwing a temper tantrum and overturning tables and acting violently? That's sinful and criminal - it's still assault.
"The majority of my information comes from how the bible described the temple. I can give you a link to a map created from what information the bible gives."
This doesn't go anywhere near giving sources for all this intimate information that you claim to have, nor does it answer why it matters what the temple looked like.
It is criminal by the laws we've made. God says to abide by the laws of the land, so long as they agree with his. The fact that our laws call this criminal and assault doesn't mean his does, an therefor we don't have to obey them. Of course, if you wish to live peacefully, you can simply obey this law and not create a fuss, but in his case, it didn't matter what quality his life had so long as he was executed in the end.
What matters about how many rooms had a altar are that Acidkoolaid said that the temple was like a football stadium, to which I replied it was not of that size, and even if it was, only one room had an altar and that far less people gathered there than in a football stadium. At most a few hundred at a time.
"It is criminal by the laws we've made. God says to abide by the laws of the land, so long as they agree with his. The fact that our laws call this criminal and assault doesn't mean his does, an therefor we don't have to obey them."
Oh really? So, god is fine and dandy with threatening others with harm? Good to know. And, I note also that you are now claiming that you don't have to follow laws that you think are contrary to your interpretation of what god wants. That could be treasonous.
"...but in his case, it didn't matter what quality his life had so long as he was executed in the end."
Au contraire. Jesus was supposedly sinless and had to be so in order to take on all of our sins (as if that makes sense, but that's your story, not mine). But, we can see that Jesus was not sinless...either that or threatening people with harm is not a sin.
"What matters about how many rooms had a altar are that Acidkoolaid said that the temple was like a football stadium, to which I replied it was not of that size, and even if it was, only one room had an altar and that far less people gathered there than in a football stadium. At most a few hundred at a time."
OK, I get it now. Although, Acid's point is still valid that just about everything requires a burnt offering, leading to lots and lots of people there all the time offering burnt things...if people actually followed the rules laid down by god, which happen to be absurd.
The money changers turned the temple into a business,having nothing to do with anything Holy.Overcharging people nonetheless,and making the temple a store and not a Temple.A Temple is a place of worship,a house of prayer,not a cheap dollar store.Nowhere in the bible does it mention that Jesus whipped any person or animal.It was used as an instrument of righteous anger and no sin was committed.Jesus said"Unless a man be born again,he cannot see the Kingdom of God."John 3:3.You will not see this,nor will you understand this unless you become "born again".There is a viel upon the eyes of them who will not believe,or accept it. unless you accept Jesus the risen Lord and Savior of your life and allow him to come into your life you will not see it.In your heart you do always feel something tugging at your heart.In 1st Corinthians 1:18 it says the preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that are perishing,but to them who are saved it is the power of God. I pray the eyes of your heart will be opened,and some would come across your path to help you to understand this.Without Christ we are doomed to an eternity in Hell. God loves you and wishes that none would turn away from him.John 3:16 says that he loves you so much,He sent his son in your place to die for your sin.Please consider this and search your heart. Love in Christ,Doug
Doug,
Was there anything in your comment that I have not already addressed? Simply rehashing points that have been handled and then proselytizing is not a compelling argument.
Even if Jesus didn't physically whip anyone, he threatened them with bodily harm. Even if they were being naughty in the temple, it does not give Jesus the right to threaten them with bodily harm and scare them. I suggest you read the comment I posted just above the one you posted.
God is a God of Love, that is why Christ was willing to die for humanity. But God is also a God of Wrath, and He will punish sin. Christ loved and healed, but He also was totally committed to holiness. The sacrifices could be avoided in this manner: do not sin.
Corey,
Your faith teaches that we can't avoid sinning, which is why we all supposedly deserve to be tortured for eternity.
And, sorry, it's not a loving action for god to finally take some measure of responsibility for his own actions, even though we know that transference doesn't actually do anything.
And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of fthe money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.” And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them. Matthew 21:12-14.
What's the motive? Is it anger and sin that cause Jesus to drive the thieves from the temple, or a desire to allow people who need healing to come in?
The ends justify the means? It's OK for him to physically attack other people because he decided that he had to use that spot to help people? He couldn't help people elsewhere or non-violently make his point and show his intentions to the people in the temple? Sorry, but not a good excuse and still not acceptable, especially in a system that is supposed to be based on absolute morals.
Whips are loud! He didn't have a bullhorn to get everyones attention so they would hear what he had to say.I don't believe he whipped any human or animal. I believe the whip was just to make a loud noise and get their attention. Then he began to tell them NOT to desecrate the Temple (aka His Fathers house)
You say that you hate Jesus. Well, I'll tell you this. It's Jesus that'll get you to Heaven. John 3:11-21 & Romans 10:9-10. If you continue to deny Him now, He will surely deny you when YOUR time comes and you will be placed in a cell in hell as you will feel, with all sensitivity, your flesh ripped and burned alive and you cannot die but will have to endure the pain of it all over & over again. I only tell you this because I wish for you to be saved.
"I don't believe he whipped any human or animal."
Whether he actually physically hit any human or animal, he's still guilty of assault. He physically threatened them with a very harmful and potentially fatal weapon.
"You say that you hate Jesus."
It's hyperbole. It's impossible to actually hate a fictional character.
"It's Jesus that'll get you to Heaven."
Evidence please? Evidence of heaven and/or hell, evidence of Jesus, evidence of god, evidence of a soul? You got any of those?
And, I note that when in doubt, you fall back on the threat argument.
"I only tell you this because I wish for you to be saved."
Not only is Pascal's Wager a horrible argument, but how do you know that you have it right? Are you infallible? If not, then it's possible that you are wrong about this as well. And, being wrong, you could very well be making Allah very angry at you. Perhaps you should also worship Allah, you know, just in case he will be judging your soul in the end and sending you to Muslim hell.
Hey GCT. Do you think that the whole bible is fiction and some one just made it up for fun? Prove why that can be true. Once you think up some then tell me. You think that Jesus is fictional too? Well, I feel sorry for you. Obviously you have never felt God's love. You have been too busy trying to lead people astray that you haven't been paying attention to your own life. It also says in the bible "Do not lead little children astray for that is a sin."
Hey Snoopy. Do you think that the whole of Greek mythology is fiction and that somebody just made it up for fun?
You think Apollo is fictional, too? Well, I feel sorry for you. Obviously you have never felt Zeus's love.
Snoopy, who lead you astray?
Actually, Greek mythology IS fiction. And, yes, someone made it up. That sort of thing happens all the time.
There is exactly the same amount of credible evidence for the existence of Jesus and His daddy, as there is for Apollo and his daddy.
(I'm assuming you are okay about not feeling Allah's love. Or Buddha's love. Or Vishnu's love.)
Probably not every piece of the Bible is made up, but large chunks of it certainly are. The whole entire Exodus story seems to be made up as there is no evidence (as there would be if it were true) of thousands of people wandering the deserts for years, as well as no evidence that the Israelis were ever in Egypt or that Egypt suffered horrendous plagues.
As for proving it, it's enough to point out that these stories do not have evidence to back them up. The evidence should be there, but it's simply not, and in some cases the evidence speaks against such things having happened. We have no accounts of Jesus until well after his supposed life, and nothing that we can hang our hats on to say, "Yeah, Jesus existed and said or did these things."
Lastly, I don't feel sorry for me. I have an open mind that is free from the shackles of irrational and dogmatic thought (and no, your instructions from the Bible hold no sway over me). I'm free to live this life and enjoy it rather than always casting an eye to the tyrant that is the Xian god and hoping that he doesn't disapprove of me and want to cast me into eternal torment - or alternatively longing for the next life of bliss so much that I miss out on the only life that we actually know we have. And, if I'm missing out on some love from god, it would be god's fault, which is contradictory for you. IOW, your story doesn't hold water, as you posit an all-powerful god that desires a relationship with me but is impotent to even approach me and simply make contact. He's either a bumbling idiot or he's not all-powerful (or both). Take your pick because he can't be perfect and also have his plans/wants/desires go unmet.
Actually GCT in the bible it says that Pharaoh chased after the Israelites after having second thoughts about letting them go. All the men of Pharaoh drowned in the red sea, all their chariots got destroyed and their horses drowned. Just maybe 20 or 30 years ago men found chariot wheels and bones from a horse and bones from a man. Besides, I shouldn't be needing to prove anything for God's word is the only truth in this messed up world.Besides, if you don't think that God made the earth, how did it get there? Even scientists aren't sure. They just made up the big bang theory and the evolution theory because they didn't want to understand that someone greater than them made the world.Besides, that is all that those things are:theories. And also Tigerboy I am okay without feeling Buddha's love because he is nothing but a statue so can't possibly love anything.
---"And also Tigerboy I am okay without feeling Buddha's love because he is nothing but a statue so can't possibly love anything."
That's so true. I totally agree with you. Mythical figures cannot love anybody.
We cannot possibly feel "love" from a mythical figure.
Any "love" we feel from mythical figures is obviously an invention of our own creative minds. You've got it exactly right.
Snoopy,
"Just maybe 20 or 30 years ago men found chariot wheels and bones from a horse and bones from a man."
These findings are not in the right location, not indicative of the supposed size of the massacre, and simply not very compelling.
"Besides, I shouldn't be needing to prove anything for God's word is the only truth in this messed up world."
If you want me to take that to be true, you certainly must give a reason for me to accept it. When a Muslim tells me the same thing, why should I believe you over her? What basis do I have to decide between the two?
"Besides, if you don't think that God made the earth, how did it get there? Even scientists aren't sure."
Scientists are "sure" of anything if you mean absolute certainty. That's not how it works. We do have enough evidence, however, to conclude how the earth formed.
"They just made up the big bang theory and the evolution theory because they didn't want to understand that someone greater than them made the world."
This is just plain asinine. Do you honestly think that scientists are all a bunch of atheists and have been for centuries and are really just looking to commit some fraud upon the people by making up stories? That's what religion does. Science operates using actual, you know, evidence. The evidence we have is strong for both the big bang and for evolution. We have reams and reams of data in support of both theories.
What you're proposing is a massive conspiracy that would be impossible to maintain.
"Besides, that is all that those things are:theories."
And, you seem to be completely ignorant of what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is not just a guess as that word is used by non-scientists. It's a powerful explanation for a multitude of hypotheses that are well supported, a large basis of facts and data, and the coming together of multiple lines of inquiry by multiple branches of science to come to the same conclusion. Theories are the top of the food chain in science.
There's no evidence for the story told in Exodus.
Despite the fact of the story being about MULTITUDES of Hebrews living for generations in bondage . . .
Despite the fact of the story being about MULTITUDES of Hebrews being liberated from Egypt and being led, en masse, across the desert . . .
Despite the story taking place in an area that has been studied by archeologists more intensely than just about anywhere else on the entire planet (!), Egypt, the Middle East . . . .
. . . there is no compelling evidence that the story of Exodus ever happened.
We know so much about the ancient Egyptians, because they where SO GOOD at keeping records and preserving their history for antiquity! They were experts at recording the particulars of their lives and their culture.
But, there are no records showing the enslavement of millions of Jews. They kept slaves, yes. Other Egyptians. Not millions of Hebrews. There's no evidence for that.
The pyramids were built by PAID laborers. THAT we have evidence for. Multitudes of Jews wandering in the wilderness? It's a myth.
I encourage anyone to look at this. God bless you. The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.” —Matthew 28:5-7
Jesus Christ isn’t in the tomb. And get this: The guards are lying on the ground like dead men, and the stone has been rolled away.
Some of the guards get up and race to the chief priests with an amazing story. “There was a violent earthquake at the tomb, and this angel — WHOA! He was bright like lightning and actually rolled away the heavy stone!”
What do the priests do? They bribe the soldiers to lie!
“Tell everyone that you fell asleep and that those pesky disciples stole the body. Above all, don’t even mention the stuff about the earthquake and the angel!”
(Check out Matthew 28:1-15 for the full story.)
For centuries people have acted like those stubborn priests and have tried to disprove — even ignore — the resurrection of Jesus Christ. After all, if our Lord didn’t rise from the dead, then everything He said and did would be a lie, right? What’s more, anybody can claim to be God — psychiatric hospitals are filled with such misguided people. But to say you’re God and then prove you’re immortal — that’s another matter.
Christ’s resurrection was the proof, the seal of authenticity. And not only have people failed at disproving it, but during their research some have actually become Christians!
Yet the heart of man is often blind. Just look around and you’ll spot lots of skeptics. That’s why it’s important that Christian guys be prepared to talk about the greatest event in history. So read on, and let Breakaway show you how to lay some groundwork for guiding others to the truth.
Let’s take a look at the top three arguments people use — along with some solid answers.
“Maybe Jesus wasn’t really dead, and He just rolled away the stone himself.”
Right. A man who has been beaten, tortured and mutilated for hours is going to lie unattended for two cold nights in a tomb and suddenly find the strength to roll away a 2-ton rock, fight off all the Roman soldiers guarding it, then show up convincing everyone that He has a glorious resurrected body. That would be pretty hard to believe.
And while we’re talking about His body, let’s not forget the blood and water that flowed from His side when the soldier speared it on the Cross. If He were alive, the wound would have spurted red blood. But in a dead body, the blood separates into massive red clots and watery serum, just as John described it. (See John 19:34.)
“Maybe the disciples moved Christ’s body.”
Hmmm, let’s consider the facts: A group of men who have dedicated their lives to a teacher who insisted on truth and honesty are suddenly going to turn into liars and swindlers. And each of these self-seeking no-goods will be willing to face poverty, incredible hardship, torture and even death to perpetuate that lie. Not a chance.
(Continued) Then there are the Roman soldiers. Considering that they were the best fighting machines in the world, it’s not likely that the disciples could overpower them and knock them all out. But even if they could, why didn’t they hurry and race off with the body before the soldiers came to, instead of painstakingly unwrapping all of the burial clothes and neatly folding the facecloth before making their getaway?
“OK, so maybe the soldiers stole the body.”
Hardly. Think about it: The very people who have been assigned to make sure that Jesus’ body isn’t moved decide to move it. What a neat practical joke to pull on their superiors. Of course, it would mean their execution for becoming traitors, but what’s a little death for a laugh or two?
While we’re looking at evidence, let’s not forget that His resurrection was something Jesus had predicted time and time again. Then, of course, there were all those Old Testament prophecies.
Once we’ve looked at all the facts and carefully examined the arguments, we would need more faith to believe that Jesus did not rise from the grave than to believe that He did.
Mohammad had gone to rest at dusk. He slept deeply on the carpet of his cousin, Mutem ibn Adi. Suddenly, the silence was broken and a voice as clear as a trumpet called :
"Awake, thou sleeper, awake!"
And Mohammed saw in front of him, dazzling in darkness, the shining Archangel Gabriel who was inviting him to follow him outside. Before the door stood a Horse as dazzling as Gabriel. It had wings, glittering wings of an immense eagle. Gabriel presented the Horse to Mohammed, saying that it was 'Buraq' the Horse of Abraham. Buraq whinnied and allowed Mohammed to vault on its back.
Then, drinking the wind, it galloped to the street and as it came to the walls of the sleeping city, it spread its wings and soared into the starry night.
---If legions of people believe something, it MUST be absolutely true!
At midnight on ashtami, the divine baby was born in Kamsa's prison. Remembering the divine instructions, Vasudeva clasped the child to his bosom and started for Gokula, but found that his legs were in chains. He jerked his legs and was unfettered! The massive iron-barred doors unlocked and opened up!
While crossing river Yamuna, Vasudeva held his baby high over his head. The rain fell in torrents and the river was in spate. But the water made way for Vasudeva and miraculously a five-mouthed snake followed him from behind and provided shelter over the baby!
When Vasudeva reached Gokula, he found the door of Nanda's house open. He exchanged the babies and hurried back to the prison of Kamsa with the baby girl.
Early in the morning, all the people at Gokula rejoiced the birth of Nanda's beautiful male child. Vasudeva came back to Mathura and as he entered, the doors of the prison closed themselves!
Snoopy:
ANYONE can cut and paste blocks of text from religious texts. It doesn't contribute anything to a real conversation!
Humans have always written amazing stories about miraculous events. We tell ourselves wild stories. They don't represent reality.
You choose to believe wild stories about a human being who was beaten, murdered, and rose from the dead.
Yet, you have no problem dismissing all similar wild stories that represent other religious traditions.
None of them is based on reality. They are myths.
The story of Jesus is clearly a myth. Medical science can easily demonstrate that dead human beings do not rise up and walk the Earth. Teen aged girls who have never had any sexual contact with males do not give birth to children.
These are EASILY understood and demonstrated concepts.
There is no question that, maybe, sometimes, under special circumstances, people rise from the dead, or occasionally, once in a while, some girls give birth without having had sexual contact, or a few people choose to fly up to the sky without artificial, technological means. The world doesn't work that way.
Wise people understand that these things cannot happen.
Stories that tell about the "one time" those things really did happen lack basic credibility.
Making a claim that you know that there was this "one time," back before you were born or could have any possible first-hand knowledge of the event, but you know that this "one" really important exception to the laws of physics REALLY DID take place, and a human carpenter REALLY DID fly up into the sky . . . that just makes you seem really, really gullible, or like you have some sort of agenda to convince other people who are really, really gullible.
I, for one, am not that stupid.
The march of scientific knowledge really must (EVENTUALLY) sound the death-knell of religious foolishness. We've already come too far. It's just a matter of time.
(If religious foolishness doesn't kill us all, first.)
First things first. Snoopy, it is considered bad form to cut and paste someone else's words without attribution. In fact, it's dishonest and deceitful. What was that you pasted about Jesus preaching truthfulness?
Secondly, it is not up to me to disprove your fantastic stories. It is up to you to provide some reason to believe that they may be true. You have not done so. You have assumed they are true, then said that in the absence of a good argument against it somehow shows that the stories are true. It's called begging the question. I doubt you would agree with that methodology for other stories, like the ones that Tigerboy included.
Lastly, the very best argument against is that we don't have any evidence to suggest that any of it ever happened. The only "testimony" we have is from the gospels, which were written well after the supposed events by people who were not there and were largely cribbed from each other. Not to mention that they were written with the OT prophecies in mind (of course you would write your hero in and make that person fit the prophecies) and they still got some of them wrong.
It's noteworthy that historians of the time recorded none of these earth-shattering events. No mention of the earthquake appears anywhere. No mention of Jesus and his movement appears anywhere. Contemporary accounts of these events simply do not exist. So, where is this evidence that you claim overwhelmingly supports your position?
First thing. Why do you hate Jesus so much?
Second thing. Why are you so determined to prove that he is not real?
Third thing. I am not going to ever come back to this website ever again. You probably have better arguments than I do. I am just glad that I have told you about what I thought about Jesus the Christ. I am not even going to come back to look at what your response to this comment will be. You are probably thinking, "Right. Of course she'll come back. She is just saying that." Well I am not just saying that. I mean it. I hope that you have a wonderful Christmas.
I'm not the least bit surprised.
"I can't defend my fantasy/delusion. I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and run away."
"I can't handle the truth!"
I don't think that anyone is "so determined to prove he is not real." How about ANYTHING concrete to suggest he IS real?
I like reality.
1. The blog title is hyperbole. No one can actually hate a fictional character.
2. I don't care if Jesus existed or not. He may or may not have. We certainly don't have very much evidence to suggest he did. What I do care about is the harm that is done in his name based on the words that are attributed to him, which we can be pretty sure he never uttered.
3. I do have better arguments than you, and you should care about that. What you've just admitted to me is that you don't care what the evidence is, you're going to believe what you believe no matter what. This is close minded, irrational, and shows a very shaky foundation for your beliefs. If you can not defend why you believe what you believe, not only are you in violation of what the Bible says you should be able to do, but you're also showing how unreasonable you are.
I'm not sure who it is who hurt you or abused you, but it tears my heart up to see it. I bet it's more personal and not just that the "church" intellectually gave you an incomplete understanding of religion. I know the church is not perfect, it is filled with humans who screw up (that's why I love it ... it's about grace). But I wonder if you know how much trouble you go to fixated on your anger to God.
Translation:
I can't actually answer your argument, so I will describe you as emotionally damaged, and I will call your understanding of my religious delusion "incomplete."
I realize you were addressing GCT, not me, but personally, I am no more "fixated" on my "anger at God" than I am fixated on my anger at the Easter Bunny. I don't have the least bit of anger for the Easter Bunny, or for God. They are both fuzzy fictitious characters.
I am more fixated on my anger at a world that passes anti-intellectual, anti-science laws, stymies liberty and education, hates women and homosexuals, and blows up people and buildings, based on it's TOTALLY unsupported beliefs in the supernatural.
Well said Tigerboy.
I'm only going to address a couple things.
First, the idea that atheists do not believe only because they were abused is a bigoted stereotype, which is simply not true. It has more to do with religions simply lacking in substance and being wrong.
Secondly, I find that most churches teach an incomplete understanding of their religion, and they do this on purpose. We do have studies that show that atheists generally have a better understanding of religion than most theists.
Third, the idea that the church isn't perfect is very true, but the implication is that religion is not to blame for this. We can not, however, absolve religion of all blame because religion relies upon faith, and faith is not a reliable method of knowing about the world. Faith leads to all kinds of absurdities and atrocities and is the a contributor to those imperfections of the church that you admit exist.
precious, why are you so angry?
do you think GCT loves you?
Yes, of course, the stereotype of the angry atheist rears its ugly head. Yet another fly-by bigot chimes in to toss off a couple one-liners, never to be seen again - probably chortling to him/herself about how 'I showed those atheists!!!!!1111!!!!'
The entire argument you pose in the original post is complete nonsense. I suggest studying the Bible a tad before making such statements. Read through the Old Testament and then tell me that violence is can never be justified(eg. Exodus 15:3 "The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.").
The fact is that man is flawed. We are corrupted by sin and so are all of our attributes such as anger, love, jealousy, kindness and so on. They are all flawed. God has a perfect jealousy and love and anger and so on.
Deuteronomy 6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.
To think that our minds can even begin to comprehend it is lunacy.
The LORD of the universe creates man and then we go and defile his temple, a building built for the purpose of giving glory and honour to the LORD. His anger was completely justified in my opinion.
Mankind deserves nothing more than spending all of eternity burning in Hell. The LORD of the universe created us and wants us to give Him glory and honour but we betray him time and time again. It's amazing he hasn't killed us all on the spot.
The fact is that man is flawed. We are corrupted by sin and so are all of our attributes such as anger, love, jealousy, kindness and so on. They are all flawed. God has a perfect jealousy and love and anger and so on.
Deuteronomy 6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.
To think that our minds can even begin to comprehend it is lunacy.
The LORD of the universe creates man and then we go and defile his temple, a building built for the purpose of giving glory and honour to the LORD. His anger was completely justified in my opinion.
Mankind deserves nothing more than spending all of eternity burning in Hell. The LORD of the universe created us and wants us to give Him glory and honour but we betray him time and time again. It's amazing he hasn't killed us all on the spot.
The fact is that man is flawed. We are corrupted by sin and so are all of our attributes such as anger, love, jealousy, kindness and so on. They are all flawed. God has a perfect jealousy and love and anger and so on.
Deuteronomy 6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.
To think that our minds can even begin to comprehend it is lunacy.
The LORD of the universe creates man and then we go and defile his temple, a building built for the purpose of giving glory and honour to the LORD. His anger was completely justified in my opinion.
Mankind deserves nothing more than spending all of eternity burning in Hell. The LORD of the universe created us and wants us to give Him glory and honour but we betray him time and time again. It's amazing he hasn't killed us all on the spot.
oops.. I just triple posted...
"Read through the Old Testament and then tell me that violence is can never be justified(eg. Exodus 15:3 "The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.")."
Oh, the OT is full of violence, which I've amply shown in other posts. Here's the problem for you though: Jesus was supposed to be peaceful and sinless. You're claiming that he was in the right to fashion a whip and attack people when he clearly was not. This is especially true since the Pharisees explained to him why it was necessary to have money traders in the temple, which was an OT custom.
You can't have it both ways though. You can't call Jesus peaceful and sinless and then claim that his violent outbursts were OK because he is the god of war.
"The fact is that man is flawed. We are corrupted by sin and so are all of our attributes such as anger, love, jealousy, kindness and so on. They are all flawed. God has a perfect jealousy and love and anger and so on."
These are not facts. And, what does it mean to say that god has perfect jealousy, love, anger, etc? Jealousy is usually seen as a flaw. Again, you can't have it both ways.
"Deuteronomy 6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth."
Make him angry and he'll destroy you. Wow, such a loving god you've got there. I can see why people would want to worship such a vengeful tyrant. Oh wait, no I can't.
"To think that our minds can even begin to comprehend it is lunacy."
Yet, you're claiming that you can. You're claiming you understand well enough to say that it's OK. Again, you can't have it both ways.
"Mankind deserves nothing more than spending all of eternity burning in Hell."
This is hateful rhetoric. So much for Xianity being all about love. Why do you hate your fellow human beings so much?
"The LORD of the universe created us and wants us to give Him glory and honour but we betray him time and time again."
So, he created us so that we can glorify him? Why would a perfect being need such glorification? Why would a perfect being need us to honor him? Why would a perfect being need to be so selfish as to create a race of beings that he would later torture for eternity just for his own amusement and enjoyment? Your god is a monster.
And, by what right would god have to create us destined for hell and then to kill us as he wished? You've taken all the responsibilities that god should take on as our "father" and abdicated them in some medieval might makes right sense. When people have children, they take on a moral obligation to treat those children well. Their act of creating a sentient human being means that they've taken on responsibility to go above and beyond. Your god, however, is allowed the opposite according to you. This is special pleading and not a moral stance in the slightest.
"I suggest studying the Bible a tad before making such statements."
This is the funniest part though. Don't assume that because I disagree with you that I must necessarily be ignorant of the OT. A recent study showed the atheists are more knowledgeable than Xians on the Bible and Xianity. Additionally, I've shown pretty good knowledge of the OT in other posts on this site. Lastly, just because there is tons of violence in the OT does not mean it is justified. The flood was not justified. Soddom and Gommorah was not justified. The genocides of whole tribes of people was not justified. You've stepped into this and claimed all those things were not only right, but good. You're defending genocide, slavery, rape, and a whole host of other things with your comments. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
I feel like I should add something here.
"Read through the Old Testament and then tell me that violence is can never be justified(eg. Exodus 15:3 "The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.")."
Just because something is in the OT does not mean it is justified. When is god justified in using violence? Should not violence be a last resort? And, should not a perfect god with omni-max powers be able to avoid having to go to the last resort? By claiming that god had to use violence, you're essentially saying that god is not omni-max. The violence of the OT is not justified.
TIL Jesus was kind of a bad-ass
TIL Jesus was kind of a bad-ass
TIL Jesus was kind of a bad-ass
Jesus was NOT assaulting anyone. He was clearing the temple from all the corruptors who used the temple as a marketplace to buy and sell cattle for their own benefit. He made a whip to chase them ALL away. The temple was the "House of Prayer" converted to a "Den of Thieves" as Jesus called it. He was defending His Father's Holy House. Jesus had every right to be angry for wrongdoing. In today's world, the religious leaders continue to corrupt the church and continue to convert it to a "Den of Thieves" by false prophets giving false teachings. Would you be angry if you gave your children only good examples and taught them to do only what is righteous. After you caring for them, healing them when their sick and opening their eyes to God's commandments to live by and they still DO NOT OBEY. After all you have taught them and done for them, you come home and find them disrespecting your home by smoking weed, doing drugs, selling drugs and are making lots of money? ( This is just an example) Would you be angry? Of course you would. Jesus was human when he walked the earth. He had human emotions. Please do not judge Him. He is the reason our sins were forgiven. Pointing out scriptures and reading them does not give you the understanding you need. You cannot open a book and read a couple of lines in a few chapters and understand what the book is all about. You would need to read the entire book to understand it. We have a lifetime to read 1 book which is the "Word of God". Not many people will study it and understand it as God intends us to. Jesus warned the unbelieving people- John 8:45-47 So when I tell the truth, you just naturally don't believe me. Which one of you can truthfully accuse me of sin? Anyone whose Father is God, listens gladly to the word of God. Since you don't, it proves you are NOT God's children.
"Jesus was NOT assaulting anyone."
Yes, by definition, he was.
"Jesus had every right to be angry for wrongdoing."
But not every right to initiate violence.
"Would you be angry if you gave your children only good examples and taught them to do only what is righteous. After you caring for them, healing them when their sick and opening their eyes to God's commandments to live by and they still DO NOT OBEY."
The point of children isn't to make them obey you.
"Jesus was human when he walked the earth. He had human emotions. Please do not judge Him."
Nice try there. If Jesus was truly human, then there's no need to capitalize "Him." You're trying to have it both ways.
"He is the reason our sins were forgiven."
Via a convoluted process that makes no sense and that none of us asked for.
"Pointing out scriptures and reading them does not give you the understanding you need. You cannot open a book and read a couple of lines in a few chapters and understand what the book is all about. You would need to read the entire book to understand it."
What makes you think I haven't read it? I have. It's trash. It's full of evils, such as genocide, rape, slavery, hell, etc.
Jesus is ego so as long as you can't hang your ego no one wins
Jesus is a worthy man and like you said he just made a whip to make fear. He was angry because the people were doing evil against him and back then whips weren't illegal. Jesus never sinned once in his life he was torchered and beaten and when he was on the cross he was torchered even more. And as for the aroma of dead animals God found the aroma pleasing just like humans do we cook meat on the grill and we like the smell it smells good. Jesus is a man worthy of praise and glorification not a man to hate I mean even when we did him wrong by killing him he still loved us tremendously and never ever once hated us he just got mad at us.
GCT,
I see that it has been a while since you last posted anything on this blog. Are you out of the Jesus-hating business or have you simply found other things in your life taking greater importance? Just curious.
Sometimes evil people justify taking necessary actions.
Justifying your own actions when they are wrong is a very human thing to do...
Post a Comment